Please BIS, fix Stryker to Tank cargo values

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Hi all, but especially BIS.

This is a plea to BIS to redefine/add values in cfgvehicles for the next patch so that the Stryker vehicles gets some decent cargospace. Currently it appears to use the parent class "car", which has extremely low values for MaxWeapon and MaxMagazines. The M113 has double this amount, and is set on the vehicle instead of its "Tank" parentclass. I always clear cargo and fill up using available space, leaving a few slots in spare in case someone has some heavy weapons to leave behind in the vehicle.

Please! This limitaiton makes the Strykers pretty much unusable when it comes to operating them on a lenghty mission, as any equipment changes you do in the Stryker leaves a lot of equipment outside it. For the nonforgiving player, he would just scrap the mission as buggy.

For now, I'm stuck with M113's for my missions. The M113 may have little space, but I think it just adds to the fun of having to use a supply system (although a hefty bit of micromanagement is needed). The Strykers are just impossible since it's only half the space.

I'm no great coder, but I can't think of any negative side effects of adding this, unless a flawed engine may cause problems.

[.kju 3244]

Is an addon a suitable solution for you?

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I realize this would be easily "fixed" with an addon, but no; this is "bugfixing" that should be done on an official basis.

People don't like SP missions that require a bunch of addons, me included. Having to use scripting to fix safe mode (units getting stuck in safe patrolling) is very frustrating -- shouldn't be required.

[Placebo 29]

Troubleshooting is for crashes, freezes, gameplay affecting bugs and the like which IMO is not an appropriate place for this discussion, you don't want the solution as an addon, well it's either move this to A&M:D or close it, for now I'll move it.......

[SniperRedHawk 0]

Really, I like the M113 more because it moves faster on non-paved surfaces in Arma compared to the Stryker.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I don't have any specific problems with the M113, except for one thing; if we're waiting for something to happen and want to keep quiet, I have to move the gunner to the inside if I'm driving the vehicle. This is because any movement the gunner does, will start the engines. The AI driving skill on the M113 is also far superiour to that of the Stryker I think because it's on tracks.

However, the M113 is besically being replaced by Strykers, and the Stryker seems to protect the units better especially with the added grid-armor (stops RPS's effectively, but not used in ArmA). Using Strykers in ArmA leaves you with 2 different choices (disregarding the ATGM), the M113 only have one (disregarding the Vulcan and the medical version), as armored infantry transports with fighting capabilities.

I miss several Stryker variants, as well as M113 variants.

But... Back on track. Would others be perfectly happy with an addon fixing this issue, or do you think it should be fixed officially?

[Commando84 0]

Addons would be good enough for me but hey its just me. If it would be official it would be better but maybe if you get enough people on to this then maybe you could get your wish. Imo they should add a hmmw with stinger launcher and a brdm with stinger launcher too. maybe having the same amount of ammo as Hmmw tow and brdm Atgm? I haven't used strykers that much yet, hmm it feels limited somehow like it could be more variations but i think Bi wanted to keep it simple. think how many armor stuff you could have if strykers would come in artillery and repair options and i dunno refuel n stuff? No clue if those are existing for real but if they would have went for multi purpose vehicles taking it to the extreme. But hey give arma a year or more and more adddons and possibly patches will put in more content hopefully.

[BraTTy 0]

I have actually been playing alot of Arma lately so I can comment too.

My quirk about the Stryker that I cannot understand is that it should somewhat go better off-road than onroad.

Repair truck goes off-road better than it does.

This I think should be fixed.I hop in a Stryker thinking I could get there quicker and sneakier by traveling off-road, not the case

And yes originally with the opening back (well it doesn't open but you know what I mean) It only carries the driver and gunner (the ATGM anyways) I expected to load my crew in it but can't.

I know this topic originally refers to how much weapons and ammo you can load it, sorry I havent tried that

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Adding different weapons systems to existing vehicles would naturally be nice, but I have no problems seeing that the involved work is far too much for a simple patch. I guess BIS is aware of all these wishes from basically everyone, and I won't dwelve anymore around those.

My request was a simple cfg vehicles update which I think can be done with a text editor without any serious effects. When I think about it, yes, also the HMMWVs could be upgraded to carry some more stuff than a "simple car".

I have no problem seeing how the ATGM version of the Stryker is able to carry less units than the others. If anything serious to ask, it would be the MGS version with a cannon / artillery for that kind of use. But I know that is a huge request. What would be more interresting would be better armored Strykers so they could withstand RPGs better (that armor that looks like a grid and prevents the coppercone to reach the actual armor -- brilliant )

See also this link about what is in use at different levels and how the system is organized:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/militar....ctionii

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Quote[/b] ]that armor that looks like a grid and prevents the coppercone to reach the actual armor -- brilliant

Just for your reference, it's called "slat armor."

Oh, there's a Stryker with slat armor in OFP, if you'd like to take a look at it. I don't think it'd be too hard to add this slat armour on... in fact, I might do it myself someday (with appropriate permissions).